mi(ya)ša-
‘(a body part)’
- Language
- Cuneiform Luwian
- Grammar
- subst, neuter
- ID
- 1618
1. Individual Anatolian Languages
1.1 Cuneiform Luwian
mi(ya)ša-
‘(a body part)’1.1.1Transmission
The lexeme occurs mainly in NS manuscripts of the rituals of the Kuwatalla tradition, but also once in a mythological passage.
[E.R.]
1.1.2Forms
| nom./acc. sg. | mi-ia-ša-an-za | KUB 35.48 ii 16’ | (CTH 760, NS) |
| mi-i-ša-an-za | KUB 35.45 ii 22 | (CTH 761, NS) | |
| m[i-i-ša-an-za] | KBo 29.37, 5’ | (CTH 763, NS) | |
| mi-i-š[a-an-za] | KUB 60.59 iv 2’ | (CTH 768, NS) | |
| mi-ša-an-za | KUB 35.11 ii 9’ | (CTH 760, NS) | |
| mi-ša-an-za | KUB 35.12 iii 2 | (CTH 762, NS) |
1.1.3Graphic Features
Checked against the photograph in the Mainzer Fotoarchiv. Contra Konkordanz, KUB 35.45 is a New Hittite manuscript.
[E.R.]
1.1.3.1Phonological Interpretation
The variation between -iya- and plene spelled -ī- is typical for an original diphthong /-iya-/ monophthongized as /ī/ (cf. Rieken 2017a, specifically 23). Oettinger 2003a attempts to establish the reverse development as a sound change in Luwian, which must be regarded as entirely ad hoc, based as they are on just this example with doubtful semantics (see below under Meaning).
[E.R.]
1.1.4Meaning
The meaning ‘flesh’ for mi(ya)ša- was first proposed by Poetto 1995b:34, based on the parallelism of mi(ya)ša- and Hitt. miluli in the lists Hitt. ALAM ḫaštai miluli ‘body, bone, ...’ (KUB 7.35 ii 9) and ALAM-ša mišanza ḫašša (KUB 35.45 ii 22f.) ‘body, ..., bone’. While the semantic equation with the Hittite word is certainly correct, the interpretation of neither one is assured, as indicated in CHD L-N:253, where the whole range of ‘skin(?), flesh(?), soft tissue(?)’ is considered to have equal plausibility. The focus on ‘flesh’ is triggered by Poetto’s etymological connection with PIE *mē(m)s-o- n. ‘flesh’ (NIL:487f.), which cannot be correct for phonological reasons; see Rieken 2019c. Therefore, all possible meanings noted in CHD have to be entertained.
Among these, an inner-Hittite connection with miyu- ‘soft’ would favor ‘soft tissue’, as does the contrast with hard bones. Further, if ALAM ‘body’ can be understood to designate the outer appearance and organ of a body, then mi(ya)ša- ‘skin’ referring to the same body part becomes less probable. Thus, we are left with a general body part that is inside the body and contrasts with the skeleton; it probably includes not only flesh, but also intestines etc.
[E.R.]
2. Reconstruction
2.1Reconstruction
CLuw. mi(ya)ša- can be analyzed as a secondarily thematized neuter s-stem, i.e. *miy-aš-. It can be projected into Proto-Anatolian as *mei̯h1-e/os- n. (Rieken 2019c:222f., contra Oettinger 2003a). The contraction of miyas-a- to mīša- is an inner-Luwian development and is of no value for the reconstruction of the lexeme.
[D.S.]
For the lemma head see CLuw. *mī-.
3. Proto-Indo-European
3.1Semantic Reconstruction
According to Stüber 2002a:128, who is seemingly not aware of the Luwian stem, PIIr. *mái̯Has- (and hence “PIE *méiH‑os”, ibid.) has to be reconstructed as a resultative agent noun “was herangereift ist” > “was angenehm ist”. However, in view of the Luwian meaning ‘(a soft body part)’ and the inner-Anatolian connection (cf. PAnat. *mih1‑Éu̯‑/‑u‑´ ‘soft’), it can be assumed that PIE *méi̯h1‑(o)/es- goes back to an (adjectival) abstract noun meaning ‘softness, tenderness’. This meaning may concretize further to PIIr. *mái̯as- ‘what is tender, pleasant’ > ‘pleasure’, on the one hand, and to Luw. ‘what is soft’ > CLuw. mi(ya)ša- ‘(a soft body part)’.For a parallel, cf., e.g., the Celtic cognates W mwydion m. ‘soft inner part, kernel, pith’ and OIr. moith (etc.) ‘(sbst.) cartilage (vel sim.)’ [s.v. PAnat. *mei̯h1- ‘soft’].
3.1.1Root etymology
For the meaning of the underlying root, cf. PAnat. *mei̯h1- ‘soft’.
3.2Morphological Reconstruction
As Rieken 2019c:223f. shows, CLuw. mi(ya)ša- ‘(a soft body part)’ ought to be interpreted as a thematic derivative of an s-stem that is also continued as PIIr. *mái̯Has- ‘pleasure, enjoyment’.Rieken (ibid. p. 223) also mentions the possibility that the s-stem underlying CLuw. mi(ya)ša- may show zero-grade suffix, viz. *méi̯h1‑s‑. Since the strong stem of proterokinetic s-stems ultimately may go back to the ablaut pattern R(e)-S(Ø), such an ablaut, viz. *méi̯h1‑s‑/*mih1‑és‑, may or may not be reconstructed in this case. On a discussion of the original ablaut of neuter proterokinetic s-stems, cf. Stüber 2002a:199–204, and on the proterokinetic ablaut as such, cf. Kümmel 2014b.Thus, it is possible to reconstruct a stem PIE *méi̯h1-(o)s/*mei̯h1-és- ‘softness’.
3.2.1Root etymology
For the phonological form of the underlying root, cf. PAnat. *mei̯h1- ‘soft’.
[A.O.]
4. Transmission
PIIr. *mái̯(H)as- n., cf. Ved. máyas- n. ‘refreshment, enjoyment, pleasure’ (EWAia II:315f., KEWA II:585f., Grassmann 1996a:1006), YAv. maiiah- n. ‘satisfaction, sexual intercourse’ (Bartholomae 1904:1141)
Stüber 2002a:127f.